From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Jun 12 2004 - 22:05:50 BST
Hi all,
When a liberal's doctrine is challenged, he goes bonkers with a personal,
ad hominem, attack. Witness DMB's latest screed in which he calls me
variously "a knee-jerk ignoramus," "a right-wing ignoramus," and a "neo-
Nazi" in addition to being "foolish," "inane," "stupid," and "boring."
Sad isn't it? But I take comfort in the knowledge that when one finds it
necessary to resort to name calling, Pirsig sets him straight:
"To say that a comment is "stupid" is to imply that the person who makes
it is stupid. This is the "ad hominem" argument: meaning, "to the
person." Logically it is irrelevant. If Joe says the sun is shining and
you argue that Joe is insane, or Joe is a Nazi or Joe is stupid, what does
this tell us about the condition of the sun? That the ad hominem argument
is irrelevant is usually all the logic texts say about it, but the MOQ
allows one to go deeper and make what may be an original contribution. It
says the ad hominem argument is a form of evil. The MOQ divides the
hominem, or "individual" into four parts: inorganic, biological, and
intellectual. Once this analysis is made, the ad hominem argument can be
defined more clearly: It is an attempt destroy the intellectual patterns
of an individual by attacking his social status. In other words, a lower
form of evolution is being used to destroy a higher form. That is evil."
(Lila's Child, note 140)
Case closed.
Best,
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 12 2004 - 22:26:21 BST